[Congressional Record (Bound Edition), Volume 153 (2007), Part 5]
[Senate]
[Pages 6492-6494]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]




                             U.S. ATTORNEYS

  Mr. PRYOR. Mr. President, I have come here today to talk about the 
political firings of U.S. attorneys, which I believe raises serious 
concerns over the administration's encroachment on the Senate's 
constitutional responsibilities but now I also believe raises serious 
concerns over the Attorney General's ability to serve. That is why I 
come here today to call for Attorney General Alberto Gonzales's 
resignation.
  There has been a lot of attention focused on U.S. attorneys over the 
last couple of weeks, but this is an issue I have been involved with 
for the last 9 months. I first realized a problem existed in July of 
2006. On February 6, 2007, I testified before the Senate Judiciary 
Committee. I won't repeat that testimony here, but I will focus on five 
facts today, and these are undisputed facts. First, based on the e-
mails produced by the Department of Justice, this administration set 
out to fire or replace U.S. attorneys, some without cause and in some 
cases for suspicious reasons.
  Second, this is different from anything done in previous 
administrations and includes putting a provision in the PATRIOT Act to 
carry out their scheme.
  Third, it started with the White House.
  Fourth, it was carried out by the Attorney General.
  Fifth, the Attorney General crossed a line by putting politics above 
the pursuit of justice and has seriously damaged his stature and legacy 
in the process.
  The first of these points is proven by e-mails from the Attorney 
General's Office and the White House. The fifth point is evidenced by 
the Attorney General's statements to me, the Senate

[[Page 6493]]

Judiciary Committee, and his public statements.
  Immediately after the 2004 elections, the White House began a scheme 
to replace all U.S. attorneys. The Attorney General joined in that plan 
in early 2005 but recommended to limit the number of U.S. attorneys who 
would be replaced. During this process, the Attorney General identified 
U.S. attorneys to sacrifice to the White House demands.
  In January 2006, the Attorney General sent a memorandum to the White 
House detailing obstacles that must be overcome before going forward 
with the plan. One such obstacle was the Senate. So in March 2006 the 
Attorney General hatched another scheme to get around Senate 
confirmation. During the PATRIOT Act reauthorization, the Attorney 
General, with the apparent purpose of replacing U.S. attorneys, had a 
provision slipped in during the Senate and House conference to allow 
the Attorney General indefinite appointment authority.
  After this plan came to light, the Attorney General responded by 
misleading the American people. For example, in press interviews he 
said the Clinton administration had done something similar. That is not 
true. In an Attorney General memorandum dated January 9, 2006, it 
clearly says:

       In recent memory, during the Reagan and Clinton 
     Administrations, Presidents Reagan and Clinton did not--

  And that is underlined, did not--

     seek to remove and replace U.S. Attorneys they had appointed 
     whose four-year terms had expired, but instead permitted such 
     U.S. Attorneys to serve indefinitely under the holdover 
     provision.

  His own chief of staff has contradicted his public justification. 
Once the decision became apparent that they were going to push out U.S. 
attorneys--which, by the way, is the term the Attorney General's Office 
uses in the September 17, 2006, memo to the White House, that they are 
going to ``push out'' U.S. attorneys--there began a clear and precise 
method to obfuscate and delay the confirmation process by lying to home 
State Senators, including me. I know this because I have e-mails that 
lay out the game plan on how to get around Senator Blanche Lincoln from 
Arkansas and myself.
  I have in my hand a plan to replace certain U.S. attorneys, dated 
November 15, 2006. This memo gives a five-step plan on how to do this 
and also how to talk about it.
  Step No. 1 has specific talking points. Step No. 2 says to call and 
to contact Republican Senators. This is an important point. Step No. 2 
says the U.S. attorney--on step No. 2--should make these calls. The 
U.S. attorney says, on December 7: very important U.S. calls and 
Attorney General calls happen simultaneously. Mike Battle contact the 
following U.S. attorneys.
  So they do that, and I'm sorry, in step No. 1 they contact Jon Kyl, 
John Ensign, Pete Domenici. And then it says, ``the California 
political lead, the Michigan political lead, and the Washington 
political lead.''
  Please notice, there are no Democrats who were contacted about this; 
not even a courtesy call from the White House or the Justice 
Department. Only calls made to Republicans. If there is not a 
Democratic Senator in that State it just says ``to the State's 
political lead.''
  Clearly, this was a partisan effort on the part of Justice.
  I believe the Attorney General crossed a line when they chose to go 
the partisan route on U.S. attorneys. Now the Attorney General states 
that he was unaware of all the details of their plans that were hatched 
by his chief of staff. I do not believe this for a minute. I know that 
an e-mail written on December 19, 2006, on how to get around Senator 
Lincoln and myself is exactly what Attorney General Alberto Gonzales 
said to me in a telephone conversation.
  In fact, by way of background, I had called the White House and the 
Attorney General to ask them to please nominate a suitable nominee for 
U.S. attorney in Arkansas. They had canned or pushed out Bud Cummins. 
They were going to, or were about to, do an interim appointment for Tim 
Griffin. I asked them to please not do that and please send someone 
through the confirmation process. If it was Tim Griffin, send him 
through. I couldn't say I was going to vote for him, but please send 
him through.
  The December 19, 2006, memo is very enlightening. It is from Kyle 
Sampson, chief of staff to Alberto Gonzales. It is to Christopher G. 
Oprison, apparently at the White House. Again, this is from the chief 
of staff of the Attorney General.

       My thoughts: 1. I think we should gum this to death: ask 
     the Senators--

  And they are talking about Senator Lincoln and myself--

     ask the Senators to give Tim a chance, meet with him, give 
     him some time in office to see how he performs, etc. If they 
     ultimately say ``no, never'' (and the longer we can forestall 
     that the better), then we can tell them we'll look for other 
     candidates, ask them for recommendations, evaluate the 
     recommendations, interview their candidates, and otherwise 
     run out the clock.

  This is an e-mail from the Attorney General's chief of staff to the 
White House.

       All of this should be done in ``good faith'' of course.

  When they put ``good faith'' in quotes, that tells me they are going 
in bad faith. They are not going in good faith, but they are giving the 
appearance of good faith in order to run out the clock.
  No. 2 says:

       Officially, Tim is the U.S. Attorney and will identify 
     himself as such on pleadings and other official documents. I 
     think it's fine for us to refer to him as an ``interim U.S. 
     Attorney'' in talking points, with the understanding that by 
     ``interim U.S. Attorney'' we mean [Attorney General] 
     appointed, (as opposed to Presidentially-appointed and Senate 
     confirmed) U.S. Attorney.

  No. 3:

       Overall, I think we should take the temperature way down--
     our guy is in there so the status quo is good for us. Ask for 
     them to consider him; note that he is qualified and doing a 
     good job whenever asked . . .

  Here, again, they are telling him to tell us that he is doing a good 
job whenever asked. He hadn't been in office but 1 day when this thing 
was written. So, again, they are setting up a deception on the front 
end.

     . . . pledge to desire a Senate-confirmed U.S. attorney; and 
     otherwise hunker down.

  No. 4:

       The only thing really at risk here is a repeal of the AG's 
     appointment authority.

  You bet your life that is what is at risk because we are going to 
have that vote later today or tomorrow or Monday or Tuesday or at some 
point, and absolutely that is what is at risk because I think the 
Senate should change that law and should take that provision out of the 
PATRIOT Act, that they snuck in in the dark hours in a conference.

       We intend to have DOJ legislative affairs people on notice 
     to work hard to preserve this (House members won't care about 
     this; all we really need is for one Senator to object to 
     language being added to legislative vehicles that are moving 
     through). There is some risk that we'll lose the authority, 
     but if we don't ever exercise it then what's the point of 
     having it? (I'm not 100 percent sure that Tim was the guy on 
     which to test drive this authority, but know that getting him 
     appointed was important to Harriet, Karl, etc.

  I could spend all day talking about this memo. But, basically, in 
here they say that the Attorney General is going to tell us, Senator 
Lincoln and me, about six or seven things, and they did every single 
one of them. This is the playbook. They say ask the Senators to give 
him a chance. Attorney General Gonzales did ask me that. Meet with him. 
He asked me to, and I did. Give him some time in office. He asked for 
that, even though usually people don't get a little test drive before 
they get appointed. He asked me--they wanted to delay, just run out the 
clock.
  At one point he said if I am not happy they will interview other 
candidates that I am interested in. They also mentioned for me to 
consider him and to look at him in a way that he is doing a good job.
  Here, again, every single thing in this memo was done. Again, this is 
the playbook. This is why I feel lied to. The truth is, I was lied to 
because I was told that the Attorney General--and he not only said it 
to me, he said it to the Senate Judiciary Committee and he

[[Page 6494]]

said it to the world--the Attorney General wanted a Senate-confirmed 
U.S. attorney in every slot. That is absolutely not true in Arkansas 
based on this e-mail from the Justice Department.
  I assure you when they put ``good faith'' in quotes that means they 
are not proceeding in good faith. They didn't proceed in good faith 
with me, and that is one of the reasons I think Attorney General 
Gonzales should resign immediately. I do not think he has the 
credibility to run that department anymore.
  Let me tell you this. I was one of six Democratic Senators who 
supported Attorney General Gonzales' nomination and confirmation. I 
supported the PATRIOT Act. Not all Democrats did. I have worked closely 
with this Attorney General. I have always tried to deal with them and 
reach out to them and have a constructive, positive relationship. I 
believe that is what the people in Arkansas want me to do, and that is 
exactly what I have done.
  But on this issue, Attorney General Gonzales has broken faith with 
me, he has broken faith with the Senate, and he has broken faith with 
the people of Arkansas. When an Attorney General of this country, who I 
believe should be held to a higher standard--not a political standard 
but a high standard of integrity because he should be all about 
justice, not politics; he should be all about justice--when the 
Attorney General lies to a United States Senator, I think it is time 
for that Attorney General to go.
  Again, he not only lied to me as a person, but when he lied to me, he 
lied to the Senate, and he lied to the people I represent. For that 
reason I am asking him and demanding that he resign today.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Arkansas.
  Mrs. LINCOLN. Mr. President, I come to the floor to speak on a 
different matter, but I want to compliment my colleague from Arkansas, 
who is not only a colleague and a true Arkansan but a great leader. I 
appreciate the passion that he feels and the issue that he deals with 
and feel very blessed to have him as my colleague from the State of 
Arkansas.
  Mr. PRYOR. I thank the Senator.
  Mrs. LINCOLN. Many of us believe that the events at the U.S. 
Attorney's Office and how they have been handled by the administration 
have been a real disservice to the people of this country and to the 
processes that provide the transparency so that our great democracy can 
work, so that the wheels of this great democracy can turn and the 
people feel confident and trusting in their Government because these 
processes have worked and provided that transparency. To have 
eliminated the processes, or to circumvent the process that provided 
that transparency, the administration has presented a real disservice 
to the people of this country and to the justice system and what it 
represents. So I applaud my colleague for so many of his comments today 
on that very issue.

                          ____________________